tv [untitled] December 23, 2010 9:30pm-10:00pm PST
crane cove park fits in the open space network of the entire pier 70 area. we have plans to connect it as a part of the blue green way trail, and the bay trail. so working with all of that in mind and recognizing that there is a time line ticking on the expenditure of funds, we have identified a four-phase planning and design process to come up with a concept for crane cove park. the first phase is to create a concept for the entire seven-acre project, which is illustrated in green with the addition of the pink slip way in the area. as a part of that we would develop cost estimates for the entire project. throughout the pier 70 planning process, we identified all of crane cove park as being a $30 million project, recognizing we only have about $15 million. we recognize we don't have
enough left to complete the park in one phase. so developing a plan for the entire park that we can phase improvements on in the coming years is his critical. all important is identifying chunks of the project we can phase based on the available funds we have to spend on crane cove. then the last part of the first phase will be to identify initial phase based on funding. second phase is design developments and cost estimates for what the initial phase is. and then the third phase is to do the detailed design work, specifications and bid documents. then the final phase is construction support as a part of the process. again, based on the complexity of the site, we feel it is going to need a cohesive team of specialists, led by a landscape architect, since they
are typically do park planning and open space tanning april work. because of the historic resources, we know we need an architect. because of the contamination issues, we need environmental engineers. because of the structures on-site and the potential need for roadways and side walks, we need coastal engineers, mechanical, electrical and a cost estimator. and lastly, working with the human rights commission, we identified that the subcontracting goal is 19% participation by certified l.b.e. firms. for the selection of the team we are going to have a panel of port and non-port staff in project-related profession disprince. it will be overseen by the port contract administrator and monitored for 14-b compliance. we will be apaiding the submitals.
55% written. those that rise to the top will be invited for interviews. and then we will have 45% waiting on the interview process. and then the top teams scoring on the written again will be invited to interview. the highest ranked team successfully negotiated with fees that can meet and address the needs of the scope will be recommended for approval by the port commission. the schedule that we are looking at is if we receive approval today issuing the r.f.p. in early january, having it due in mid february, having preproposal meetings, and ideally coming back to the commission in late march for authorizations. >> thank you. so moved. >> second. >> is there any public comment on this item. wow, you did a great job,
david. you have answered everyone's questions. thank you. all in favor. >> aye. >> resolution 109 has been approved. >> item 8-cr, request approval of a preferred concept design for the james r. herman cruise terminal located along the embarcadero at pier 27. >> good afternoon, i am john from the planning development staff. welcome, commissioner crowley. port staff is asking for approve to initiate schematic design only for work on scheme b-2 of the cruise terminal project. this is an option that would create a new 96,000 square foot terminal building at pier 27. if approved, the design team would commence design early next month. for the last two decades, i think both of you know, the
port has attempted to build a cruise terminal for the last two decades. because of various public-private partnerships primarily at pier 32, those efforts have failed. we are now trying to build a new cruise terminal and build it as a public works project so that we would finance and be the masters of our own destiny. in 2007 the mayor's blue-ribbon cruise terminal advisory panel recommended that new cruise terminal be at pier 27. since then, last july we presented to the port commission two design options. a scheme a, which involves renovation of the existing pier shed. and then scheme b, to demolish and build a new facility. both schemes, a and b, assumed a facility of 80,000 square
feet, and port staff assumed that the renovation scheme, scheme a, would be significantly cheaper, but it wasn't. after the port commission hearing in july, port staff presented schemes a and b to various schoirled groups. as a result, a third concept emerged, what we are now calling scheme b-2. the genesis is that both schemes included a minimally sized baggage area. that was a design compromise to reduce the overall construction cost despite it's adverse impact on operational efficiencies. for this minimally-sized baggage area to function adequately, the lay-down process would have to be divided into various cycles, which would increase the amount of time it takes to process the
baggage. although the minimally sized baggage area would reduce up-front construction costs, it would result in an increase in operational costs and would have a negative -- we felt -- a negative impact on the passenger experience. for this reason, port staff asked the design team to evaluate the cost and the design impacts of providing an optimally sized baggage area, which turns out to be about 33,000 square feet. that would be consistent with cruise industry standards. b-2 has that. it would be consistent with the design team's statement, which recommended a larger baggage area, and it would be used, and it would meet the standards for the foreseeable future based on increased vessel size and passenger volumes. table one in your staff report
shows the comparative costs of each of these schemes, schemes a, b and b-2. scheme a -- again, these estimates are based on conceptual work, so they tend to be -- could be of freight variance as we provide further. scheme a was at $86 million in tomato project costs, scheme b, $91 million, and scheme b-2, almost $100 million. the cost of each of those schemes are higher than what was presented last july. funding this project under any scheme still remains an issue. while scheme b-2 represents the most expensive option, it also represents the most operationally efficient option. in july port staff had expected to present the port commission approval of a design option
last fall. but because of the funding -- or the cost associated with each of the schemes and then the emerging discussions with the america's cup team representatives, port staff deferred recommendation of an action until a potential solution could be developed to solve the budget issue. with the america's cup, as you know now, the host city agreement with the america's cup presents a possible win-win solution. the project schedule envisions completing design and obtaining entitlements by the end of 2011 and completed construction by the end of 2012 to allow america's cup racing events to occur in 2013. as you know, the board of supervisors approved the host city bid this afternoon. and if san francisco is selected as the host venue for
america's cup by the end of this year, the concept would be that the authority would contribute to a portion of the port cost to prepare the pier 27 site plan, and then we would construct a core and a shell of the new cruise terminal. the terminal building would be used as an event center for races scheduled in 2013. although countless details need to be worked out, the authority as i understand it now requires demolition of the entire pier 2 shed and possibly -- pier 27 shed and possibly a portion of the pier 29, although we have received no site plans from the authority at this point. the authority would then contribute approximately $7.5 million to this project primarily for demolition and
shore side power modifications. this potential budget solution provides two potential advantages. one, to relieve the port from financing an entire cruise terminal project in consideration for the authority's use for a preprescribed amount of time under a license. and two, to accelerate the design and construction of the core and shell of the building for the cruise terminal. again, there are many important details that need to be worked out in the coming months if the america's cup comes to san francisco. we have lots of concerns, including one to complete a detailed design and implementation plan to integrate the port's mission to build a cruise terminal with the authority's event needs. again, we have not sat down with the authority to really -- with respect to project teams, to actually figure out what
they want or how they want to use the pier 27 and 29 area for the event uses. secondly, to implement a project funding program that completes the cruise terminal project for a 2014 cruise season, and eventually deliver the northeast wharf plaza. thirdly, to ensure grant obligations are fulfilled. and fourth, develop a berthing plan that allows multiple cruise calls at other pearce during 2012 and 2013. despite the concerns, the strategy to integrate the host city agreement with the port's mission to build a new cruise terminal appears to be very promising. in order to meet the obligations set forth in the host city agreement, pier 27
design and entitlements would have to be completed this time next year. to meet this ambitious schedule, we feel it is necessary for the design team to initiate work on scheme particular -- zem particular -- schematic design early next month. time is of the essence. if san francisco does get the america's cup, we will be off and racing. and any time lost will be difficult for us. with regards to the proposed funding strategy, again it is just a proposal. we are not asking you to approve what the funding is because we don't know it completely yet. but there would be two phases to the cruise terminal project. phase one would be again to build a core and shell to
accommodate the america's cup racing event in 2013. and a very, and i emphasize very, cost estimate to build that core and shell is about $75 million. the port currently has $31 million it could contribute now, and there could be additional debt issuance of $29 million. with the 31 plus the 29 million, that gets to $60 million, which means there is already a shortsfall of about $15 million. so either we would have to do some value engineering on what is defined as the core and shell, or we would have to find additional funding sources. but we would come back to the port commission when that funding strategy -- once we know what it is. but when the racing event is finished in 2003 -- 2013, the port would also need to
complete building the improvements needed for a cruise terminal facility. needless to say we will have a complete funding strategy for phase one and phase two, and we will return to the port commission to provide you details of that. so to summarize, we are requesting approval to initiate only the schematic design on scheme b-2, an option that would create a new 96,000 square foot cruise terminal at pier 27. we believe this design work could be integrated with the city's proposed -- or host city agreement for the 34th america's cup. and if san francisco wynns the america's cup, the interim use by the america's cup could help solve a funding gap for the cruise terminal and accelerate
the design and construction of this building. again, we hope to bring this back to you. as soon as we get information, we will get that back to you. but over the next months, we would like you to review -- come back here for schematic approval and overall site plan of how phase one and two works, as well as funding plan. with that, i would like to introduce peter and dan lamb to briefly go over what scheme b-2 is from a design perspective. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i just wanted to quickly introduce you to our core design team that makes up the
cruise ship terminal design team. k.m.d. architects is joint venturing with fowler architecture to form the design team for the project. we are teamed up with the well-known cruise ship terminal designer out of miami. we are very excited about the news we heard this afternoon about the america's cup possibly coming and possibly helping us push the project forward into the next phase. to date we have completed about a third of the overall project phases for the project. we are very anxious to move into schematic design to kickstart this in the coming year. i want to introduce you to peter. peter will talk a little bit about the design on the project for you.
>> good evening -- i guess it is evening now, commissioners. it is a pleasure to be back before you. i know it is late in the afternoon, so we are going to try to quickly orient you to scheme b-2, because i know at least two of you saw it before. commissioner crowley, we will try to get a quick review of how we got to scheme b-2. up on the screen now you see the general site plan. of note is -- can you get a pointer working, dan? can you point to pier 27? which is a non-historic building. it is one of the few non-historic buildings along the waterfront, and therefore, a good candidate for demolition in order to build the cruise terminal. adjacent to it is our new installation of shore side power, which is already in place and operating. at the end of the pier is an
area that we will be retaining for operations. however, that is something that may change with the america's cup use as they have talked about removing pier 27 all the way down to the end of the pier. next slide, dan. as you know already, the plan is to demolish the front of the building to create the northeast wharf plaza, which will be the next significant civic space in san francisco. and then behind that towards the water will be the cruise terminal. what you see on the screen is scheme a and b. scheme add looked at reusing the existing shell, and scheme b looked at using a new building on the side. the existing shell did not
offer us much of an opportunity to do a green building because it was not environment altight. also, the g.t.a. that we could provide with the new structure was increased in size. this reduced traffic impacts during some of the larger ship calls and was a significant motivator for choosing the newer scheme. so after feedback from the cruise ship industry, we looked at the larger option. dan, shift to the next scheme. which makes the overall building longer. so it encroaches slightly into the plaza area, and it gets longer towards the part where we allow trucks to go out to the apron, which is that area there that dan is .ing to. again, that provisions area on the end -- provisioning area on the end would probably be
demolished by the america's cup needs to aleo views in that part of the site. next slight. you can see there is a long thin space on the ground floor that can be used for event spaces and is the primary lay-down area for ship arrival. when you are going to a ship, you pull off the embarcadero. you pull into the ground transportation area. there is accommodation for taxis, buses, personal vehicles. and those can all pull immediately off the embarcadero, minimizing impact of traffic on the embarcadero and into the g.t.a. up in front of the building, people go inside, and they go up to the second floor, which is shown on the bottom of the screen there, into a departure lounge, which then allows direct access out on to the gunningway. currently we have one gangway.
the building is designed to eventually accommodate two gangways in the future. on the other mode, they come down here to long thin space. one of the excelling things -- compelling things about this scheme was it had a lot better numbers for event use. as we have made the building longer and offered more flexibility in the building, in particular we've reconfigured the building to allow it to open on to the plaza space at the very tip of the building. that is a real benefit for the different kinds of uses, particularly for the america's cup proposed uses of the building where different kinds of event-related uses can be
accommodated in these basically open bays of the building. next slide. so the building is long and thin. it is about two stories high. in height it is actually smaller than the existing structure that you see there, so it shouldn't be a significant impact. next slide. these are some views of it, an aerial view looking down on it. it has a simple roof form. the next slide, you can see looking at the main arrivals area you can see as you came up to it as ae strahan walking over from the embarcadero promenade. next slide. looking at the face of the building that addresses the plaza where it opens up to the plaza, we have some large roll-up doors there and some covered space that makes a kind of front porch for the building to the active plaza space with
the northeast plaza. next slide. and then the main entry that you would come to as you came up to the g.t.a. offering people a kind of collection space for people who are coming in and out of the building. and then a series of views looking at the kind of ground transportation area, and looking back towards the city from the building. next slide. and then an overview of the building giving a sense of the size of the public space created and the cruise ship terminal. so you can get a sense that the cruise ship terminal is a good vehicle for -- it is right sized for the future needs of the cruise i industry -- cruise industry, and it offers a shell that would be beneficial to the america's cup uses and a great opportunity for the city in both cases. if you have any questions, i would be happy to answer them. thank you. >> thank you.
so moved. >> second. >> is there any public comment on this item? >> part of me would say couldn't we wait a couple of more weeks until we know, but i also recognize we need to move forward. and if you are saying that this scheme with the expanded bag ang is what we need to do, then it is what we need to do. because if we are going to undertake this and not be looking forward as to what is going to be required, then the whole effort would seem to be wasted. i hope we can get moving on it. you all are very creative at finding funding, so i am comfortable that it will come. >> comment? >> i would just ask as a technical point, but rigging points with heavy loads going
in, anchoring those with the shell. how many events do take place with the america's cup as we predict, they will need apparatus for hanging weights and balances and trusts and motors. >> there is some serious head >> stretching there. we need to resolve all the loads on the pier points. that is something we will help them with moving forward. >> is there any provision for gray water or environmentally friendly platinum status down the road? >> yes. we are targeting lead silver, and we to make this the greenest building we possibly can. that is certainly a commitment the team has and that the port shares. >> thank you. >> i just have one question on the cost. on table one, the total cost for scheme b-2 is $100 million.
but yet on table two, the total use is $114 million. i was just wondering what the difference is? >> right. the $99.9 million was for the cruise terminal and the g.t.a. only. moniqued asked as one point as well what would it cost to do everything you wanted to do for the northeast wharf plaza? that is an additional $14 million. >> ok. that is just for the plaza? >> that is just for the plaza. >> ok. >> but there are other ways to reduce that cost over time that we would consider over the next few months. >> ok. thank you. commissioners, all in favor. >> aye. >> resolution 10-80 has been approved. thank you. >> thank you. >> item nine, new business. >> commissioners, monique had
to go back up to the mayor's office. anything i can relay to her? it has been a fun meeting. >> lots of good stuff. >> any public comment on new business? >> item 10, public comment? >> is there any public comment on public comment? [inaudible] >> i'm sure you will. >> can i have a motion to adjourn? >> move to adjourn. >> second. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> meeting adjourned at 5:13. happy holidays.